High CourtsSingle Bench

Kripalsingh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh Station

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 8 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 MP CK 0067

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5580 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 497 words

Anil Verma, J

Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is in Jail since 30/01/2021 in connection with

Crime No. 30/2021 registered at P.S Balakwada Distt. Khargone (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 25/27 of Arms Act.

As per prosecution story, on 13.01.2020, police has received secret information regarding some unknown persons having arms. Acting upon the said

information, police reached the spot, intercepted motorcycles bearing registration numbers MP 46 MK 0131 and MP 10 ND 1280 and searched the

accused persons and recovered seven country made pistols and two live rounds from Gurupreet Singh, two pistols from Kripal Singh (present

applicant) two pistols from Ritu alias Ritendra Singh and four pistols from bag in the hands of Jagdish alias Jaggu. Accordingly offence has been

registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. No further custodial

investigation is required. There is no prima facie evidence against him. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, but final conclusion of

trial will take sufficiently long time. Applicant is in custody since 30/01/2021. He is a permanent resident of District Khargone. Co-caused Sunil has

already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25/10/2021 passed in MCRC no. 386462021 and co-accused Ritu has been enlarged on

bail by this Court by order dated 13.1.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 58402/21, therefore, on the ground of parity, present applicant deserves for grant of

bail.

Per-contra, learned PL for respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case dairy.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature of allegation and also taking note of the fact

that co-accused Sunil and Ritu have already been enlarged on bail in similar circumstances; applicant is in custody since 30/01/2021; investigation is

over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no custodial interrogation is required; and possibility of delay in conclusion of the trial cannot be ruled

out, I deem it proper to release the accused / applicant on bail.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his

furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of

the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Before releasing the applicant from the custody, the Jail Authorities are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of Covid-

19 infections and shall comply with the directions issued by the Hon;ble Apex Court in W.P.No. 01/2020. Certified copy as per Rules.